Bruce, That is very close to incivility.... be careful.
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote: > I subscribe to Tommy's cheerleading group "PresidentBarackObama" where he > whorishly spams his list with idiotic pieces by Frank Rich, Paul Krugman, > and other Leni Reifenstahl boobs who lick Obama's sphincter every day. > While Tommy (how old are you Tommie?) shakes his pom poms > > > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hey Bruce! Meet Tommy For News!! Tommy, Heeeeere's Bruce!!! >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Bruce Majors <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Tommy is deeply sub-intellectual while sprinkled with that pretentious >>> pixie dust that keeps hi smugly picked in his own ignorance. So faggoty >>> intellectually >>> >>> The Cold, Crisp Taste of >>> Koch<http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/31/the-cold-crisp-taste-of-koch> >>> >>> Jesse Walker <http://reason.com/people/jesse-walker> | August 31, 2010 >>> >>> From Frank Rich's >>> rehash<http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/29/thats-rich-frank> of >>> Jane Mayer's recent hit >>> piece<http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all> >>> on >>> the philanthropizin' oilmen Charles and David Koch: >>> >>> When David Koch ran to the right of Reagan as vice president on the 1980 >>> Libertarian ticket (it polled 1 percent), his campaign called for the >>> abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and >>> welfare but also of the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and public schools -- in other >>> words, any government enterprise that would either inhibit his business >>> profits or increase his taxes. >>> >>> You might be wondering why the author thinks a campaign that wanted to >>> abolish the FBI and CIA was "to the right of Reagan." It looks like Rich is >>> just recycling Mayer's *New Yorker* story here: Mayer wrote that the Ed >>> Clark/David Koch ticket "was running against Ronald Reagan from the right." >>> >>> [image: The man who beat Barry Commoner.]In fact, Clark is pretty much >>> the sole Libertarian presidential nominee to have consciously presented >>> himself as running *from the left*. (The only other case that even >>> arguably comes close is Michael Badnarik, the party's standard-bearer in >>> 2004, who played up his antiwar stances and established a friendly >>> relationship<http://reason.com/blog/2004/08/02/libertarians-and-greens-room-f> >>> with >>> Green nominee David Cobb.) Clark told reporters he was a "low-tax liberal" >>> (which, whatever else you think about it, rolls more trippingly off the >>> tongue than >>> "liberaltarian<http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/26/is-liberaltarianism-dead-or-wa>"); >>> he issued white papers that presented a liberal-friendly, gradualist >>> approach to shrinking the state; he got Eugene McCarthy to appear in a >>> campaign ad and to write the intro to Clark's campaign >>> book<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0898030471/reasonmagazineA/>. >>> (And then McCarthy turned around and endorsed >>> Reagan<http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=QkMcAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Cl0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=2943,3225105&dq=eugene-mccarthy+ronald-reagan&hl=en>, >>> wrecking his lefty street cred. So it goes.) Frank Rich's description of >>> what the "campaign called for" is drawn from the radical platform adopted by >>> delegates at the Libertarian convention, not from the Clark/Koch campaign's >>> own statements. Look at *those* and you'll find calls to reduce >>> government spending to Kennedy-era levels, a suggestion that welfare need >>> not be cut until unemployment is eliminated, and an education >>> plan<http://www.amatecon.com/etext/ecwp/ed/ecwp-ed-toc.html> centered >>> around the idea of a tax credit for "voluntary educational alternatives." >>> >>> That was the Kochs' center-left side. In the Carter years, much of the >>> brothers' libertarian largess went to projects with a far more left-wing >>> flavor. Radical intellectuals and investigative journalists contributed to >>> the Cato Institute's *Inquiry* magazine; Students for a Libertarian >>> Society devoted most of its energy to opposing conscription and nuclear >>> power. In June 1979, such activities prompted *National Review* to run >>> its own contribution to the Koch-conspiracy oeuvre, featuring the immortal >>> cover line "Anarchists, backed by corporate big money, infiltrate the >>> freedom movement." Before Mayer was tracing the money trail from the Koch >>> brothers to global warming skeptics, *NR*'s Lawrence Cott was warning >>> conservatives that Koch funds were linked to the Campaign to Stop Government >>> Spying, the leftist Institute for Policy Studies, and members of "the* >>> apparat* that exposed the American agent who was murdered in >>> Athens<http://reason.com/archives/2005/07/14/agees-revenge>." >>> To give you a sense of how excitable Cott could be, that scary-sounding line >>> about the "apparat" was a reference to some*Inquiry* contributors who >>> had also written for the anti-CIA magazine *CounterSpy*. >>> >>> If you combine the accurate elements of the Cott and Mayer articles, >>> you'll have the rudiments of a much more interesting story, one that may >>> begin with the brothers' Bircher background and end with the rise of the Tea >>> Parties but will take some unexpected detours along the way. The new >>> narrative wouldn't be so easy to fit into a simple left/right, Red/Blue >>> framework, let alone the pinko conspiracies of Cott's imagination or the >>> corpo-conservative cabals of Mayer's. But the tale just might tell you a few >>> things about the vast world to be found outside the *Crossfire* format. >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:42 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Tommy, Tommy, Tommy, >>>> >>>> to say ".... to accuse all >>>> of us who care about helping others..." >>>> >>>> I believe in helping others, I have founded a school, built a non- >>>> denominational church, fed hundreds and housed hundreds more.... all >>>> of my own volition >>>> >>>> To have the government do this is un-constitutional. No one has a >>>> right to tell me which insurance policy to buy, or to buy one for >>>> someone else. Health and or health insurance is not a "Right" nor is >>>> it an entitlement. I did not approve of nor did anyone I know vote for >>>> the bailout of the car companies... there is no basis for firing one >>>> of their executives. >>>> >>>> I do not agree that the US has any business building or rebuilding >>>> Mosques OVERSEAS... (60,000,000 this year..so far) >>>> >>>> There are many other things as well. >>>> >>>> As to Beck and his rally.....There were several "Politicos" but could >>>> you please point out that part of their speeches that was indeed >>>> political or even mentioned the political system in more than abstract >>>> terms. >>>> >>>> I am eagerly awaiting any pointed response to my post. >>>> >>>> On Sep 1, 3:24 pm, Tommy News <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > *You and I know that Beck has NO beliefs, religious, social, civil, or >>>> > otherwise. He is certainly no expert on ANY religion and he certainly >>>> has >>>> > no grounds to judge what is in our President's heart. His "I have a >>>> scheme" >>>> > rally was beyond bizarre. >>>> > >>>> > This whole rant is being brought to us by Karl Rove, Dick Armey, and >>>> the >>>> > Koch Brothers to further divide this country. Glenn Beck claims to be >>>> a >>>> > Mormon, but he changes his demented tune every day. He is getting >>>> daily >>>> > help writing this drivel. First, he used hatred of illegals, then >>>> Muslims, >>>> > and he and Palin are working hard to divide this country...now about >>>> > religion...who believes in what, when. >>>> > >>>> > He is totally using real compassionate love of neighbor ideals to >>>> accuse all >>>> > of us who care about helping others...to turn us into some kind of >>>> enemy of >>>> > "conservatives"....such a bucket of warm spit. He is NO expert on >>>> > anything...he was lucky to make it through high school. Yes, he is >>>> > definitely obsessed, but religion has nothing to do with theology, but >>>> > rather his addiction to power and attention. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks for letting me explain what he is really up to...in case anyone >>>> out >>>> > there is tempted to latch on to the ravings of a mad man.* >>>> > >>>> > On 8/31/10, Robert Morton <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > My problem with Beck is that his concepts are simplistic, indeed, >>>> including >>>> > > the chalkboard lectures on this TV show. Also, mixing religion with >>>> politics >>>> > > frightens me. If any European leader mentioned religion like our >>>> politicians >>>> > > do constantly, they would not be reelected to office. I'm a firm >>>> believer >>>> > > in Global Warming from a purely scientific stance, and am very >>>> tired in the >>>> > > "tree hugging" accusations from conservatives thapt a conspiracy >>>> exists to >>>> > > create a global warming falsehood. Glen Beck attacks Global Warming >>>> > > scientific community under the guise that he's saving his children >>>> and >>>> > > grandchildren from a liberal global warming hysteria created to >>>> increase >>>> > > government power and control. He's wrong and is actually endangering >>>> the >>>> > > lives of the next generation. Visit my conservative DECLASSIFIED >>>> > > SECRETS-2 site at http://declassifiedsecrets2.blogspot.com/ and >>>> read >>>> > > the article "*(A-T) **U.S. SPY SATELLITES NEEDED TO "SPY ON POLAR >>>> BEARS". >>>> > > *The Joint Chiefs of Staff, Military Advisory Board (MAB- a Pentagon >>>> think >>>> > > tank), and various other such groups believe not only does man's >>>> activities >>>> > > exacerbate the normal global warming effect, but that man's >>>> activities and >>>> > > global warming itself is a National Security Threat to America's >>>> safety. >>>> > > If you read the MAB's incredibly detailed and scientifically perused >>>> report, >>>> > > you'll question Glen Beck's assertions. Robert >>>> > >>>> > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:06 PM, greg dog99 <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >> While I am not a huge Beck fan, I am reading his book 'Arguing with >>>> > >> Idiots', and finding myself agreeing with much of what he has to >>>> say. Very >>>> > >> much anarcho-libertarian sentiment. The fact the founding fathers >>>> thought of >>>> > >> their work as divinely inspired seems to raise the hackles of many >>>> whom >>>> > >> otherwise consider themselves Libertarians. >>>> > >> Greg >>>> > >>>> > >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Keith In Tampa < >>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>> Maybe not your cup of tea Robert, but there was no, "Religious >>>> > >>> Overtones".....It was a religious rally, period! That was the >>>> point of the >>>> > >>> rally, to get closer to God. >>>> > >>>> > >>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Robert Morton < >>>> > >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I'm a Barry Goldwater, Ronal Reagon Republican and I hated Glenn >>>> Beck's >>>> > >>>> rally, especially the religious overtones. Robert >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Keith In Tampa < >>>> > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I have read a number of far left extremist blogs and news >>>> media >>>> > >>>>> reports regarding Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally >>>> yesterday, to >>>> > >>>>> include the New York Times, the Daily Kos, TruthOut.org, and a >>>> couple that >>>> > >>>>> Tommy Tom For News has thrown into the mix this morning. The >>>> rally, which >>>> > >>>>> was held at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary of Dr. >>>> King's >>>> > >>>>> speech was attended by no less than a half a million people, and >>>> most >>>> > >>>>> estimates have the crowd at over one million. There were no >>>> serious >>>> > >>>>> conflicts; no major arrests, nothing cosequential at all about >>>> the event, >>>> > >>>>> but to read the far left's account of what took place yesterday, >>>> you would >>>> > >>>>> think it was a great big hate-fest. >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Beck attempted to create a non-political rally, in that he asked >>>> that >>>> > >>>>> no one bring protest signs, and for the most part, very few >>>> individuals >>>> > >>>>> did. The rally was to be a "Pro-American-Pro-Religious" event, >>>> and for this >>>> > >>>>> reason, those on the left, especially the far left Anti-American >>>> movement in >>>> > >>>>> this Nation, hated it, and have done everything that they can >>>> do, to >>>> > >>>>> discredit the event. >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> The attempt by the Left to paint the event as racist and hateful >>>> > >>>>> was seriously undermined by the appearance and speech by the >>>> niece of Martin >>>> > >>>>> Luther King, Alveda King, a noted Black political activist. Then >>>> came the >>>> > >>>>> claims that Beck's call for a religious renaissance in the >>>> United States was >>>> > >>>>> somehow anti-Constitutional. The First Amendment, as you well >>>> know, does not >>>> > >>>>> forbid the mention of God in American life -- even official >>>> American life. >>>> > >>>>> In fact, it appears to say just the opposite: "*Congress shall >>>> make no >>>> > >>>>> law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the >>>> free >>>> > >>>>> exercise thereof*". Geez, the Moonbats really hate that, if >>>> only they >>>> > >>>>> could somehow do away with the Constitution!! >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Our Declaration of Independence ends with these words: "*And >>>> for the >>>> > >>>>> support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the >>>> protection of >>>> > >>>>> Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, >>>> our fortunes >>>> > >>>>> and our sacred honor*." Renewing our 'reliance on the protection >>>> of >>>> > >>>>> Divine Providence' doesn't seem like such a bad idea, even after >>>> 234 years, >>>> > >>>>> and despite the hateful yells and derogatory remarks from the >>>> likes of Tom >>>> > >>>>> For News, and host of other far left extremist socialist-elitist >>>> Moonbats. >>>> > >>>>> It is in fact the far left, socialist-elitist extremist camp >>>> that is so >>>> > >>>>> filled with hate and so Anti-American, that is so blinded by >>>> their hate. >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> -- >>>> > >>>> > >> -- >>>> > >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> > >> For options & help seehttp:// >>>> groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> > >>>> > >> * Visit our other community >>>> > >> athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> <http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> > >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> > >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> > >>>> > > -- >>>> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> > >>>> > > * Visit our other community >>>> > > athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> <http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. >>>> > Have a great day, >>>> > Tommy >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at >>>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at >>> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Mark M. Kahle H. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
